Posted on 07/01/2025 10:50:33 AM PDT by marktwain
In the Ninth Circuit appeals case of USA v. Metcalf, the oral arguments were held on June 12, 2025, in Portland, Oregon. The case centers around the federal prosecution of Gabriel Metcalf for possessing a firearm in a gun free school zone outside his home in Billings, Montana. Gabriel had no prior criminal history.
The attorneys arguing the case were the same as in Montana. The Federal defender arguing for Gabriel Metcalf was/is Russel Hart. The Federal prosecutor was/is Thomas Godfrey. The three-judge panel in the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit consists of Judge Mary M. Schroeder (Carter appointee), Judge John B. Owens (Obama appointee), and Judge Lawrence Vandyke (Trump appointee).
The prosecution claimed Metcalf had been told he was in violation of federal law. The defense countered that the day Metcalf was arrested, there was an article in the paper in which a local police chief said Metcalf had not done anything they could arrest him for, so the police were going to talk to federal officials.
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...
I hope the 9th will do the right thing here. What this man has gone through is so wrong.
The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Although they do have a very long list of locations and circumstances under which it will absolutely be infringed.
It’s interesting to read about a prosecutor pushing this seemingly minor case, while a counterpart in Moscow, Idaho, has run from prosecuting the Kohlberger case, instead grabbing a plea deal that will keep all sides out of a court fight; in the “interest of justice” of course for the families, whose own desires for real justice were cast aside. Something strange in the water of the Pacific Northwest.
Given the obvious exemptions for government guns, dearly loved by all libs, you,’d think the 2nd was only about the right of government to keep and bear arms.
Seriously? A Carter appointee? Over FIFTY years on this bench?
That is ridiculous and offensive.
I hope this case ends the GFSZ idiocy.
Having gun free zones around schools NEVER stopped a school shooting.
Criminals don’t care what the laws are.
Who are these people who only want criminals to have firearms near schools?
To my peril I ignore them frequently. Judged by 12 than carried by 6.
Federal government should pay the legal fees for the defense, commensurate with prosecution costs.
Particularly in a case like this where there is no victim.
What is you have a home for decades and the big bad govt builds a school next door to you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.